FierceHomlandSecuroty brought to my attention a Study by DHS (.pdf) they obtained under the Freedom of information act.
A cursory scan of the study suggest that (at 392 pages), it is a rich source of data and probably of continuing interest, so I have added it to the blog’s references page. I’ll try to give a more in depth review later. I have also added an earlier report–GAO briefing slides for Congressional Committees, April 20, 2012, “Observations on the Coast Guard’s and the Department of Homeland Security’s Fleet Studies”[PDF]
The study helps explain the apparent cancellation of NSCs #7 and 8, in that the DHS study finds very little difference in mission performance between NSCs and OPC, to justify the NSCs apparently much higher price, but it also leaves room for a revision of this decision because, they expect not building NSCs would reduce the fleet’s capabilities at least into the 2030s. The study recognized there remain many unknowns and at least to some extent recognizes the urgency of replacing the cutter fleet, so, at least to my reading, it identifies no definitive single best course of action.
I suppose the report’s authors believe things will remain static in the world. I believe a similar report was done prior to the passage of the Volstead Act. The Coast Guard should start looking at some navy cast-offs to supplement the fleet.
Question, how many more miles can the USCG get out of a used FFG-7 before we finally send it to the scrap yard. If the report is accurate and true. It maybe time for the USCG to look at the US Navy casting off their used FFG-7’s and see if we can take them.
“The NSC is currently in production, while the OPC acquisition is not slated to deliver assets until
The original POR for Deepwater was for ICGS to deliver the first OPC this year – 2012
Along with that:
110s=0 (in 2010)
123s=49 (in 2010)
NSC=7 (8th in 2013)
The stretch out of the procurement is alsopart of the reason for the increase in cost. Lower production rates increase unit cost. plus higher inflation rates in the shipbuilding industry than the economy at large. We have been funding an average of one NSC every two years.
There really are no useful Navy castoffs. The FFGs have been poorly maintained and keeping them going would cost more than keeping 210s and 270s going.
Thanks for answering chuck. I just wanted to know if it’s possible because I know the US Navy is getting rid of the FFG-7’s and their are some countries that are still using the FFG-7. I thought what if it was possible to take some FFG-7’s off the US Navy’s hands until the OPC comes online.
Dekort, why did your own blog fold?
It wasn’t my blog.
My guess is there is a new owner and they didn’t want me to post. (Or anyone else apparently as my post was the last one)
That is a shame. Although you can contact the owner Thom aka “Thomas Jackson” through his Twitter and LinkedIn accounts if you like.
Tell him the staff at E-city are sorry he had to leave after being outed.
That was Thom Roddy. Sorry, I failed to proofread my post Mike.
Pingback: “Cutter X” Revisited | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Pingback: FY2017 Budget Priorities–Commandant | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Pingback: Navy Boosts Target Fleet Size to 355. What is the CG Target? | Chuck Hill's CG Blog